That Darn User Experience is Wrecking My Usability
Back in 2006 I wrote the article "The Battle between Usability and User-Experience", where I illustrated that usability and user experience are two different things. Since then, I think, the problem has grown in proportion.
The main problem is that most people, and usability practitioners (like me) in particular, simply do not understand why people keep getting fantastically excited about useless stuff. We understand why people hate stuff that doesn't work, or takes an hour to setup. But we don't understand why people like something that looks and feels sensational. We don't understand what user experience is all about.
Just take a Lamborghini. It is a tremendously cool car. You don't even have to drive it to really want one. And the people who have tested it have a smile on their face like they have just... well, you know...
But the Lamborghini is one of the most useless cars in the world. It is too wide, too low, and has too tiny windows for it to be used to go shopping in. Not to mention that there is no place for you to put your shopping bags. And, even though it got 6 gears, you will be breaking the law when you get to 2nd (above 65-70mph). Basically, you will always be driving in 1st gear.
In terms of usability it is rubbish.
So why do almost everyone feel excited when they see one - male and females alike. They should hate it. Know that it is useless. They should feel nothing, and instead look at the Ford parked next to it. But that is not how it works.
Deep inside our brain, is a primeval instinct that makes us excited about cool things. And that part kicks in long before your "normal" analytical brain takes over and analyzes the situation. So you feel excited about a Lamborghini, before you realize that a Ford is a more sensible choice.
But that is not the only part that makes us tick about user experience. The most important element is the way it allows you to associate yourself with something. In short, you don't get excited about a Lamborghini only because it is cool, shiny and a bit dangerous. You get excited because you can imagine how you would feel driving one.
User-experience is the ultimate instinct for selfishness.
How to use it to your advantage
The thing is that when you create a product or web application, you, of course, need to make it usable and efficient. But no matter how hard you try to do either of those things, you will never end up with a Lamborghini.
You are using two different parts of your brain. You feel good about usability and efficiency because of your analytical brain - that part of you that thinks. But you feel sensation and childish joy using your primeval brain - the part that controls your instincts and unconscious feelings.
You need to ask yourself:
"What can I do to my product that will make other people feel madly excited about their person?"
Not what you can do to make people feel excited about your product - but excited about themselves!
Solve that, and you will have a great user experience.
Comments
Jonathan - Apr. 30, 2008
I would put your point this way. There is no such thing as good design. There is only better (or worse) solutions to problems. If you problem is to impress your friends, then the Lamborghini is great design.
This - by the way - also means that you can't design an experience any more than you can dance about architecture. You can only have an experience, and solve problems by design. I wish more people in the "design industry" looked at things in this way. It sure would settle a lot of stupid argument.
Matthijs - May. 1, 2008
Jonathan makes an interesting point. But I don't agree with saying there is no such thing as good design. Maybe it's about semantics and how you define things. But if you create/design a good solution for a problem then that is what I would call good design.
I'm also not sure about your second point. Maybe it's not possible to "design an experience". But it is possible to design a solution in such a way that users have a great experience. And that's Thomas' point, if I'm correct.
Thomas Baekdal - May. 1, 2008
I do think there is such a thing as good design - in fact, I think many of the articles in my design section is an example of that.
But I do agree with Jonathan, that the way you approach a problem can result in either good or bad solutions - and that neither of them may have much impact on the user-experience.
I do also think that you can "create" a great user experience - but you can't do it by thinking analytical as you would creating efficiency and usability. It is not a problem you solve, it is an emotion you create. But you can create it in purpose.
But it is possible to design a solution in such a way that users have a great experience. And that's Thomas' point, if I'm correct- Matthijs
Yes, exactly!
chiwah - May. 1, 2008
I think that we must before all take into account the user needs. Different population have different needs, and will see the the car in a different way.
- For a women which use a car primarily for shopping and to drive her children to school, a Lamborghini would be highly un-usable and gives poor user experience.
- But for a men who doesn't have children and doesn't do family shopping. And maybe only use the car to be from one location to another in the faster way possible, a Lamborghini would be highly usable. I even think that this kind of men will break the law very frequently to assure a maximum in term of efficiency and efficacity of his task :)
Thomas Baekdal - May. 1, 2008
It is not just men who are likely to break the law in a Lamborghini :)
Jonathan - May. 1, 2008
Perhaps it would be better to say "There is no such thing as good design, only good design in context." That is, you cannot say a Lamborghini is a better design than a Mini, because the context of use of the Mini is not comparable to that of the Lamborghini.
I don't usually agree with Thomas (and he with me), but I think he is correct to say that the approach of the designer is crucial.
As an aside, this also reminds me why art and design need to be kept apart. When designers start thinking that what they are doing is artistic, they deserve to die. Design is not, and cannot be, art and vice versa. Art can only be about the artist's expression, not about the solving of problems for other people. Philippe Stark's juicer is design because of this, not art. Jeff Koons's balloon animals are art because of this, not design.
Finally, to Matthijs's assertion that you can design a solution so that somebody has a certain experience. Unfortunately, people can have different experiences of the same thing. People's "problem spaces" differ, and you are not in control of that. Stop thinking of yourselves as "experience designers" - it's condescending and treats people as if they are robots you can program. You cannot control people. You are designers, that is all.
Matthijs - May. 1, 2008
I think that no one really disagrees here. We mainly differ in how we word things. If I say there is such a thing as good design, context is included, for me that's a given. If I have a good experience working with my computer, that's in the context of doing computer work. Of course my computer is not well designed to be used as a gardening tool. And of course that Lamborghini is not well designed as an off road safari car. But I can see what you mean and agree that there are "designers" who leave context out.
As to your last remark: I'm not sure were you get it from that I think people are robots I can program. Again, maybe it's just how we define/word things. But say, if I design a roller coaster for an entertainment park. I design it in such a way that it goes fast, makes loops, has high g-forces, etc. That way I can almost be certain that most people going in it will be excited and scared a bit. That's the whole point of that thing. I am not forcing anyone to be scared. If someone goes in it and feels romantic afterwards, fine with me. I'm not controlling anyone. I'm just building that roller coaster in such a way that the chances of someone getting a very excited experience are large.
Goos - May. 2, 2008
I am kind of missing the difference between aesthetics and usability. In the ideal situation the aesthetics of the product enhance / support the usability of the product. In the Lamborghini that is probably not the case. But it serves a goal for a specific group of people (context). I like reading the comments, good discussion.
Context of use - May. 9, 2008
Important to consider regarding usability!!
Anu - May. 28, 2008
I wholly agree with Jonathan - and what a great conversation.
Design is design. People are keen to for value the wrong way around, from outside to in. It should go from the inside outwards.
The point here goes not only for design, it applies to advertising too or any kind of content creation other than art in it's many forms. And just like Jonathan said, it's all about problem solving!
Travis - Jun. 2, 2008
That's a great point Thomas... but what about post-it notes? They don't make me feel sexy, but I still want them....
Any thoughts?
Thomas Baekdal - Jun. 3, 2008
Travis, Post-it notes is not something you want because it gives you a great user-experience. It is a purely functional object (and a very practical one too). It is one of those examples where the need to get something done heavily outranks all other concerns :)
andreas Ringdal - Jun. 11, 2008
"Design is not, and cannot be, art and vice versa. Art can only be about the artist's expression, not about the solving of problems for other people."
But artits can be really good at creating good experiences.
Andreas Pizsa - Jun. 19, 2008
The difference is right there in the wording. "Usability" focuses on the product or certain aspects or features of a product, whereas "User Experience" is about the user and their experience, including the things "between the lines". You can't rationally argue about an actual experience, can you. That's like becoming a "sex expert" by watching porn movies.
Which is why some folks are having difficulty relagting to a Lamborghini; heck, it's not rational at all, but it's just fun for the sake of fun itself.
It might be true to a certain extent that driving a Lamborghini might impress people - but I don't agree that that's the only goal. Another goal is pure "selfishness" (in a positive way) to enjoy the experience, excitement and irrationality.
And that's an interesting aspect, because I believe that your question "What can I do to my product that will make other people feel madly excited about their person?" is not the right question to ask because it's about the product again. You won't get a Lamborghini if you apply your question to an Audi TT, even if TTs are great cars by themselves.
Rather ask yourself "What's totally insane, what's a bit beyond people's current expectations?" and then go do that. That might include shelving your product alltogether and coming up with a new one. But you can't "just add excitement". Typically that's exactly why produts fail - if they pretend to be something which they really are not, like the hundreds of iPod or iPhone "killers" that are just mediocre products.
Best, A.
Kasper Nedergaard Sørensen - Nov. 11, 2008
"What can I do to my product that will make other people feel madly excited about their person?"
I must admit that I fell there is a problem with experience design and the values behind it. I know that's not exactly the topic here, but I think it should be mentioned. Well, the whole of the advertising business and consumer society is actually, what I'm worried about. I'm a product designer my self and I'm getting more and more fed up with all the useless products being put on the market and how manufacturers of fashion consumer products deliberately designs "planned obsolescence" into their new products. And even more worrying is how this obsolescence rate seems to just sky rocket! I have designed many "useless" products too. And to define useless, I mean products like fashion accessories and other products that people don't really need, but as a designer you make them think the do. To make them feel better about themselves artificially. Many people feel the need to change their cell phone every 6 months to keep up with fashion. When we see our friend has the new iPhone, we feel jealous and crave one for ourselves. That's good design I guess. To make people crave your product. Right? And don't you crave it because it makes you feel better about yourself? That's what I think at least. You imagine yourself wearing this fancy new coat and how other people will think positively about you. When people see a Lamborghini I believe that they imagine themselves sitting in it and having their neighbours and friends drooling and wanting what you have (thus boosting your self confidence). (I must admit that I thought that for a second or two J )Well of course, there is not any original thinking in this - everybody (should) knows that our society is over consuming; but as product designers I believe that we should remember to take a broad look at what we put into this world and take some responsibility. I just read an article in the American "New Scientist" magazine about how the planet Earth can really only sustain a population of maximum 200 million people if everybody had a so-called "standard of living" (rate of consumption really) compared to North Americans (or Danes for that matter). Yes, we CAN take advantage of people's craving for new products to make them feel good about themselves - but should we?
From http://www.reference.com:
"Planned obsolescence"
"Sometimes marketers deliberately introduce obsolescence into their product strategy, with the objective of generating long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases. One example might be producing an appliance which is deliberately designed to wear out within five years of its purchase, pushing consumers to replace it within five years."
Published: Apr. 29, 2008 in Usability
FaceBook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Flickr
Matthijs - Apr. 30, 2008
Excellent point! Focusing so much on usability alone, or style alone could make you forget it's about the complete finished experience and what it means for someone to use your website, product or web application.
I'll write down that question for sure to think about it building the next product.